Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Forced eccentricity — where it appears

The part of a small body's eccentricity that belongs to the perturbing planet rather than to the body itself. Subtracting it leaves the proper eccentricity, which is constant on secular timescales and is what makes an asteroid family recognisable.

Named by 6 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The angle that has nowhere to be measured from. An eccentricity vector carried round a circle of radius 0.034 centred at 0.031 — which is what a secular perturbation does to one, a forced eccentricity with a free one turning about it. Below, the two components e cos ϖ and e sin ϖ, which are smooth, bounded and perfectly ordinary throughout. Above, the longitude of pericentre read off them, which is not: as the eccentricity passes its minimum of 0.0030 the pericentre sweeps through most of a circle, at up to 4080° per unit time against the 12° the free vector itself turns in the same interval. Nothing has happened to the orbit. The pericentre is a place on the orbit, and a nearly circular orbit does not have one — so ω, and Ω with it at zero inclination, are angles measured from a feature that is not there. The equinoctial elements are the pair drawn below, and a propagator written in them steps through this instant without noticing it.

The elements that stop existing

An orbit needs six numbers, and three of the usual six are angles measured from features a perfectly ordinary orbit may not have. At zero eccentricity there is no pericentre to measure from, and the arithmetic knows it.

orbits · Orbital elements Earth's eccentricity is a sum of 8 sinusoids. The eccentricity of Earth over 800 thousand years, from the Laplace–Lagrange solution for all eight planets — the secular matrix built from the JPL masses and semi-major axes, symmetrised, and diagonalised by Jacobi rotations. It runs between 0.0035 and 0.0436, and it has no period, because it is a sum of 8 incommensurable frequencies. The two largest contributions to this planet are the modes at 3.73 and 7.33 arcseconds per year, drawn as the flat lines: those are constants, and everything moving in the figure is their beat. The check is the quadratic form ½ΣΛe², which a symmetric secular matrix conserves exactly and which drifts by 6.7e-16 across the whole interval — computed from the same curves the figure draws and from nothing the eigenvalues were fitted to. The true angular momentum deficit, Σ Λ(1 − √(1−e²)), drifts by 7.1e-4, and that difference is not an error either: the two agree only to fourth order in e, and Mercury at 0.206 supplies almost all of the gap.

No planet has an eccentricity of its own

Strip the short-period terms out of the planetary equations and what is left is a linear system. Its eigenvectors are modes of the whole solar system, and the number a catalogue quotes for a planet's eccentricity turns out to be a reading of a clock rather than a property of the planet.

orbits · Secular theory Io's measured heat needs k₂/Q = 0.016, and Enceladus's needs 0.011. Tidal surface heat flux against orbital eccentricity, from Ė = (21/2)(k₂/Q)GM_p²R⁵ne²/a⁶ evaluated at each satellite's own orbit, drawn at a common k₂/Q of 0.015. Every line has slope 2 because the dissipation is quadratic in e and nothing else on this axis varies. The filled marks are each body at its actual eccentricity; the two ringed ones are the bodies with a measured surface heat flux, and they are the only points here that are observations. Solving each of those for k₂/Q gives 0.016 for Io and 0.011 for Enceladus — within a factor of 1.5 of one another, for a warm silicate body and a 500-kilometre ball of ice, which ought to be a coincidence and is instead the sharpest problem in the subject: nothing about Enceladus's ice can plausibly dissipate at 0.011, and the number is what the heat requires all the same. The dashed line is the Earth's measured surface heat flux, 0.087 W/m², which Io exceeds by a factor of 28 — the most volcanically active body in the solar system is the fourth largest moon of the fifth planet, and the reason is entirely in the orbit.

A moon heated by not being allowed to relax

Tidal dissipation goes as the square of an eccentricity that tides themselves destroy, so a moon radiating tidal heat is spending something it cannot have saved. Io's would be gone in a hundred and forty thousand years, and the resonance that keeps putting it back is the reason there are volcanoes.

gravitation · Tidal heating Dissipation against viscosity for Io: a peak at 10^13.5 Pa s, and two solutions at the observed rate. The imaginary part of the Love number — the part that turns tidal work into heat — against the viscosity of the body's interior, for a Maxwell rheology at Io's size, density and forcing period. Both axes are logarithmic and the curve is not monotonic, which is the whole content of the figure. At high viscosity the body is elastic: it stores the energy the tide puts in and gives it back, and dissipates nothing. At low viscosity it is fluid: it deforms all the way and does so in phase with the forcing, and dissipates nothing again. Everything happens in between, at viscosities for which the Maxwell time — viscosity divided by rigidity — is comparable to the orbital period, and the peak here is 0.735 at 10^13.5 pascal seconds. Two consequences follow, and they pull in opposite directions. The peak is an upper limit: a homogeneous body of this size cannot dissipate more than that however its viscosity is chosen, so a measured heat flow above it would refute the model rather than constrain it. And below the peak the observed value is met twice — at 10^11.5 and at 10^15.5 pascal seconds — so a heat flow alone does not say which side of the peak the interior is on. Breaking that degeneracy needs a second observable, and the usual one is the phase of the response rather than its size. The picture treats the body as one homogeneous Maxwell solid, which is certainly wrong for a moon with a molten layer; a partial melt concentrates the dissipation and shifts the peak.

One heat flow, and two viscosities

Io radiates a hundred thousand gigawatts of tidal heat, and that number is supposed to say something about the rock inside it. It does, and not what one would expect — because dissipation vanishes at both extremes of viscosity, the measured heat is produced by two different interiors and cannot choose between them.

gravitation · Tidal heating Mercury's forced libration: 38.5″ against the 16.2″ a solid body would give. The measurement that finds a liquid core from a distance. A body on an eccentric orbit does not feel a steady torque: the pull on its equatorial bulge swings back and forth through the orbit, and the body rocks about its mean rotation by a small angle. How small depends on how much moment of inertia has to be rocked, and on nothing else — every other factor in the problem belongs to the orbit or to the body's own measured gravity field. The horizontal axis is therefore the fraction of the total polar moment that participates, one if the whole body turns rigidly together, and the vertical axis is the resulting amplitude. The curve is a rectangular hyperbola, because the same torque applied to less moment produces proportionally more angle. A Mercury turning in one piece would librate by 16.2 arcseconds. Radar measurements of the actual rocking give 38.5 ± 1.6, which is 2.38 times larger and many standard deviations away, so only 42 per cent of the moment is being rocked at all. The other 58 per cent is not following the mantle on an eighty-eight-day timescale, and the only way for an interior not to follow its own mantle is for the two to be separated by a liquid. That is how a planet nobody has landed on was shown to have a molten core — by watching, from Earth, the tiny irregularity of its turning. The figure treats the librating shell as rigid, which is right for a rocky mantle and wrong for an ice shell floating on an ocean, where the shell's own elasticity enters at the same level as the effect.

Four numbers that weigh a planet's core

Mercury rocks about its mean rotation by thirty-eight arcseconds, which is more than twice what a planet turning in one piece could manage. The excess says that most of the planet's moment of inertia is not following the mantle on an eighty-eight-day timescale, and the only thing that does not follow a mantle is a liquid.

sky · Libration One measurement, one line, and every point on it is an interior. The Love number against the quality factor, both logarithmic. An orbital measurement — a moon observed to be receding, a spin observed to be slowing — determines only the ratio of the two, so it picks out a diagonal band rather than a point, and every interior along that band reproduces the observation exactly. A body that deforms twice as easily and dissipates half as efficiently is indistinguishable from one that does the opposite. What breaks it is a measurement of the deformation on its own: a spacecraft tracking the body's gravity field through a tidal cycle measures k₂ directly, which is a vertical line here, and the intersection gives Q = 5.36·10⁴. The uncertainty on that answer is the two fractional errors added in quadrature, 20 per cent, and it is dominated by whichever of the two was worse — which for every body in the solar system is the orbital rate rather than the Love number.

A heat flow that depends on a number nobody can compute

Every tidal rate in astronomy — a moon receding, a spin slowing, an orbit circularising, a satellite melting — is proportional to one combination of two quantities that no orbital measurement can separate. One of them describes how much a body deforms and the other how badly it leaks, and only a spacecraft can tell them apart.

gravitation · Tidal heating

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Laplace resonanceLove numberQuality factorTidal dissipationHeat flowLibrationOsculating elementsSecular perturbationSynchronous rotationAndrade rheologyAngular momentum deficitAsteroid family

All concepts